On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 06:04:33PM +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> + else if(!strcmp(key, "videodatarate") && vcodec && 0
>>> <= (int)num_val)
>> this should be checking 0 <= (int)(num_val * 1024.0) or something
>> more picky
>> What is the reasoning behind this? Do you want an explicit check for
> 'sensible' bitrates? I don't see the point how: (0 < numval) != (0 <
> (numval * 1024.0))
well
double f=(1<<30)-1;
printf("%d\n", 1024*f);
disagrees
>> I attached your suggestion.
>>> likely missing regression test update
> ...
>> same
>> I ran regression test, and attached the output. I want to make it
the diff is not enough, there are more tests run once these would pass
[...]
--
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
If a bugfix only changes things apparently unrelated to the bug with no
further explanation, that is a good sign that the bugfix is wrong.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20090130/8e2fee67/attachment.pgp>